Paul T

member
  • Content count

    5,126
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    19
  • Feedback

    N/A

Paul T last won the day on January 3

Paul T had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

1,821,509 a lot of people really like this person

1 Follower

About Paul T

  • Rank
    postwhore

Profile Information

  • Gender
    not telling
  1. The old 1915 denim was heavier than the new.
  2. So... I had one of those days when I had 'time' to catch up on my various tasks which turned out to be no time at all. But I did manage to drop in at Cinch for about eight minutes and do a comparison of the dead-stock vs repro left-hand cone denim. They are very similar in terms of texture, fluff etc. The repro fabric was a touch more grey - which gave it more of a 70s look, I guess there's a good amount of sulphur in there. In general, the repro fabric is on top - but you can easily tell the difference by looking at the loom errors. As others have said, the straight 1976 looks great too and seems to be selling consistently.
  3. There were lots of changes, nearly all of them simply to speed up production and some to lower costs. "Leather-like" 2-horse label was cheaper, so was removing back pocket rivets. Keeping selvage on the outseam is already quite wasteful. I would be pretty certain that not using selvage in the watch pocket allowed them to use a very slightly shorter bolt of fabric.
  4. Maynard is right, the coin pocket selvage disappeared by the time bar tacks appeared. My late 70s pair were all tobacco, bar the belt loops and IIRC the inner chain stitch which were orange.
  5. The tobacco colour is historically correct - that's one of the hallmarks of little e jeans. Lemon yellow had completely gone by 1970, the orange went a couple of years later. Colours of the 'fixtures and fittings" ie belt loops etc varied across the factories. But essentially orange is early 70s, tobacco is late 70s. I have posted photos of my old 76 pair on here before, can't seem to find them but if i do will post them. It's so unusualy to see the full tobacco stitching, given how much orange and yellow we see, that for me it's one of the real pluses of the jeans. Perhaps because I associate that colour scheme with originals rather than repros.
  6. It is confusing, because people do talk of "unbleached" cotton yarn - when in reality it's never bleached. More ecru yarns are either specially selected, or coloured. http://loomstate.blogspot.co.uk/2016/07/gripping-yarns-part-2-hairy-experience.html
  7. Nice review. The weft isn't bleached - it's just natural cotton.
  8. yes, Lee use left-hand denim although theirs was Sanforized. And yes, Cone did supply Lee at various times. I don't know if they were supplying them in the 70s but there is a possibility this denim was destined for them. Propellerbeanie, your pants are likely the same colour, the photos of details I showed were 1 1/2 stops underexposed in order to show the stamps on the rivets/buttons. But I am pretty certain I can get to Cinch for comparison shots next week. As long as I master page-numbering formats in the thesis I have to submit tomorrow
  9. Thanks for posting, propellorbeanie! They look great. (propellorbeanie posted the standard 76 earlier. Which look true to size, like mine). I do plan to head into Cinch and try and get photos of the deadstock fabric jeans next to the left-hand versions and the standard 76 model. My pants are pretty much true to size (like my 66 pair were, unlike werd's). So I have to have a serious think about whether they'll fit ok - there's a good chance they will, and I do handily have a piece of wood cut to stop waists shrinking - depends on how much room there is about the seat and thighs. Yup, all the little mirror details, like the buttons and even rivets, are very cool. These photos are bit dark, but they actually give a good impression of the deadstock fabric, which is very stripey, with lots of weft showing, which I very much how I remember that era of denim. Not very hairy.
  10. Can't wait!
  11. they are one of the 12.
  12. Sorry for delay. This things are wild. The mirror image buttons will be really hard to work, I think! Photobucket is really slow, so I've loaded more photos on my loomstate blog. Note the loom error. Also, on these early pairs, due to a mistake they cut off the selvage! Doesn't bother me. But they are spookily reminiscent of late 70s and early 80s pair I bought new!
  13. They are a lot of money but I guess developing the denim for only 500 pairs bumps up the cost, and they'll be asking a premium for the limited edition aspect. I love my pair, but the regular 1976 pair look good to me, especially given it's a pretty authentic and distinctive cut.
  14. Maybe I'll hold off on soaking until the modern lh denim version is in Cinch. Pomata, good to see you again, those 606 rock. T Jr has been wearing a pair since last year, will try and post those soon.
  15. Sorry to hear this. Allergy tests are fairly unreliable - obviously your doctor is the one for more info about this. But I suspect the issue isn't the different types of indigo (which aren't really that different), but the sulphur, resins or starches added to different companies' denim. Natural indigo is chemically identical to synthetic indigo - but it's probably additives which are making the difference.